Another one of those seemingly endless articles which blame obesity on glands, genes, urban sprawl..........you name it, anything but lack of self-discipline.

Obesity,with rare exceptions, is the result of consuming calories excess to body requirements.

.

Seneca, did you actually read it? See the fourth paragraph which contends that what goes in the mouth is more important than exercise.

Trust me, exercise isn't exactly healthy in urban environments, and non-urban places are harder to reach for those smack bang in the middle.
It DOES make a big difference to weight levels, and it makes a bigger difference to overall health.

When I lived in the burbs, I walked a damn sight further to & from the railway station, both at home & work end, combined than I ever did walking to school, or work.

If I was faced with a 1.5 Km walk to work, I would get the car out on any but the nicest days, where I would not bother except on wet days, when the walk to the railway was only 750 meters from home, & I had little choice but to walk, at the work end.

The more I think about it, the more I think the myth is "busted" as they say.

I despair of politicians' ignorance (deliberate or otherwise) of statistics.

For example: there are more sick and dying people in hospitals, therefore there must be something wrong with the hospitals.

Those choosing to live in the sub urban sprawl compared to those in the high density areas are probably very different in themselves.

What is the comparison in age, work type, and personal wealth? These factors probably have more to do with obesity, but are also linked to where people live.

Instead some Labor dim wit will pick up the statistic as proof of his inherent belief of high density living and use it to determine everyone's lives.